Kerala High Court
D.Komalan vs State Of Kerala on 13 December, 2007
Author: C.N.Ramachandran Nair
Bench: C.N.Ramachandran Nair
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM
WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MAY 2012/9TH JYAISHTA 1934
WA.No. 779 of 2008 ( ) IN WPC/30096/2007
-----------------------------------------
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC.30096/2007 DATED 13/12/2007
APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER IN WP:
-----------------------------
D.KOMALAN
KOMALA BHAVAN, EZHUKONE.P.O., KOLLAM.
BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J.
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS IN WP:
--------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FISHERIES AND PORTS
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PORTS
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, SOUTHERN RANGE, ASRAMAM
KOLLAM-2.
3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
THANKASSERY FISHING HARBOUR DIVISION, ASRAMAM
KOLLAM.
BY ADV.MR.LIJU STEPHEN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30-05-
2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.NO.779/2008
APPENDIX
APPELLANT'S EXHIBITS
ANNEXURE-A1 : COPY OF NOTICE DATED 26/03/2008 ISSUED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE-A2 : COPY OF ORDER DATED 10/04/2008 ISSUED BY 2ND
RESPONDENT.
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE.
jg
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ.
....................................................................
W.A.No.779 of 2008
....................................................................
Dated this the 30th day of May, 2012.
J U D G M E N T
Ramachandran Nair, J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and also learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
2. After hearing both sides, we do not find any merit in appellant's challenge against the judgment because the appellant is called upon to pay the damages to the Department only because after concluding the contract he refused to sign the agreement and execute the work. Tender conditions specifically state that once the contract is awarded and if the contractor fails to execute the contract and to do the work, damages will be recovered, which is the differential amount for which the work is retendered. In this case, admittedly contract was awarded to the appellant based on his quotation at 18.4% above the PAC. However, the appellant admittedly did not execute the contract and refused to do the work. Consequently, the learned Single Judge upheld the levy of W.A.No.779/2008 -2- damages by the Department.
Even though in principle, we uphold the authority of the Department in levying and demanding damages, we feel the appellant can be exonerated from payment of interest provided the damages levied i.e. Rs.97,465/- is paid within two months from today. Therefore, this Writ Appeal is allowed in part by reducing total liability to Rs.97,465/- which the appellant is directed to pay on or before 30/07/2012. We make it clear that the relief granted is on condition of payment of damages as above, and if payment as above is not made, the amount will be recovered with interest after 31/07/2012.
This Writ Appeal is disposed of as above.
(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE) jg